Cubers you should have heard of

[Dene]

I'm just gonna throw it out there - no one cares about 2x2. Sorry guys.

About as few people care about SQ-1, and a quarter as many have done an average...

Did you see me suggesting anyone to be added to the list just for Square-1?

I'm just gonna throw it out there - no one cares about 2x2. Sorry guys.

You are bad at trolling.

I am not trolling; I am completely serious.

 

[cmhardw]

I'm just gonna throw it out there - no one cares about 2x2. Sorry guys.

You are bad at trolling.

I am not trolling; I am completely serious.

Dene, not to be disrespectful as I usually enjoy reading your comments, but this one confuses me. I think 3124 people might disagree with you on this one.

Chris

 

[Dene]

I'm just gonna throw it out there - no one cares about 2x2. Sorry guys.

You are bad at trolling.

I am not trolling; I am completely serious.

Dene, not to be disrespectful as I usually enjoy reading your comments, but this one confuses me. I think 3124 people might disagree with you on this one.

Chris

Firstly: Mr. Hardwick for usually enjoying reading my comments .

Secondly: People throw in 2x2 on the side. Let's be perfectly honest about that. A few people out there really try to get good at it, and they work hard no doubt. But I don't really see anyone being worshipped as the 2x2 king or anything, or fanboys for 2x2 masters, and the like. As far as official events go, 2x2 belongs in the scrap-heap.

 

[EmersonHerrmann]

Who's Charlie?

Exactly.

 

[miniGOINGS]

...or fanboys for 2x2 masters...

I'm a fanboy for Rowe.

 

[Escher]

Did you see me suggesting anyone to be added to the list just for Square-1?

I was expecting you to say that, and that's neither here nor there to me - I just don't like people insulting 2x2 when they know little about it.
Of course if Lukasz is included just for doing well at 2x2 then there should be balance from the inclusion of other people that are best in the world in individual events.

I'm just gonna throw it out there - no one cares about 2x2. Sorry guys.

You are bad at trolling.

I am not trolling; I am completely serious.

Not surprised either

 

[Dene]

So, I know little about 2x2? Is that because I think it is a stupid event (not necessarily a stupid puzzle in itself)? Or is it because I am not the fastest at solving it because I refuse to practise? I mean, sure I don't know many 2x2 specific algs, but does that mean I don't know anything about it?

I'm finding it hard to make sense of what you're saying :/

 

[DavidWoner]

But I don't really see anyone being worshipped as the 2x2 king or anything, or fanboys for 2x2 masters, and the like.

You don't look close enough. 2x2 has become a lot more popular in the past year.

So, I know little about 2x2? Is that because I think it is a stupid event (not necessarily a stupid puzzle in itself)? Or is it because I am not the fastest at solving it because I refuse to practise? I mean, sure I don't know many 2x2 specific algs, but does that mean I don't know anything about it?

You know little because you are making ignorant, generalized statements.

 

[Dene]

So "the past year" is relevant to this thread?

Don't dig yourself into a hole Woney. You know I don't lose arguments.

Also I wouldn't say that I am making ignorant statements. Perhaps you are mis-intepreting what I am trying to say though.

 

[Escher]

Also I wouldn't say that I am making ignorant statements. Perhaps you are mis-intepreting what I am trying to say though.

As far as official events go, 2x2 belongs in the scrap-heap.

I'd personally say that that was quite an ignorant statement.

 

[mati rubik]

you forgot Pedro Santos

 

[TobiasDaneels]

Someone not mentioned in this thread, who was a great inspiration for me.
Dan Harris.
He was there from the early beginning and has always been kind to welcome new members to the community. Also he has written a great book about speedcubing. His site has helped me a lot while learning LL algo's, and I'm sure others were helped to. And then off course there was his fewest moves contest.

Another big inspiration for me was Arnoud Van Galen, who has always helped others in need. He has inspired me to learn many other puzzles besides the traditional cubes. And he's just great company at tournement, making everybody feel at home.

I'm not saying these two need belong in the original list, but they certainly are worth being mentioned at page 10.

Further more. 2x2 is great regardless to what others say.

 

[dunpeal2064]

You know I don't lose arguments.

Also I wouldn't say that I am making ignorant statements..

Lol. Refusing to lose an arguement no matter whether or not you are right or wrong... is ignorant

 

[qqwref]

I'm going to put in a vote that Frank Morris needs to be on this list. He pretty much dominated the North American bigcube scene for several years, and also had the fastest times (i.e. the standards Dan and Michal and me tried to beat) when the V-cubes came out. Watching Frank was what got me so interested in bigcubing in the first place, and I doubt I was the only one. His work on bigcubes.com has also helped out quite a lot of cubers learn the Reduction method. To me, he's more important than a few of the people already on the list, and he is definitely qualified since he used to be much more famous than he is now.

 

[DavidWoner]

So "the past year" is relevant to this thread?

It's relevant to your statement that nobody cares about 2x2. Before Rowe (and Edouard to some extent), Lukasz was synonymous with 2x2 solving. All these people who have recently taken interest in 2x2 would do well to know that. If 5x5BLD becomes extremely popular in the future, would you say that there is no reason to mention Chris Hardwick?

 

[Dene]

Escher: Saying that 2x2 should no longer be an official event is an opinion not only held by myself, but by Tyson Mao himself. I don't see how it is an ignorant statement. It is a statement of the viability of the event, which is strongly lacking. It is an event based on luck. 2x2 single WR has already shown that. 2x2 average WR will eventually be the same.

So "the past year" is relevant to this thread?

It's relevant to your statement that nobody cares about 2x2. Before Rowe (and Edouard to some extent), Lukasz was synonymous with 2x2 solving. All these people who have recently taken interest in 2x2 would do well to know that. If 5x5BLD becomes extremely popular in the future, would you say that there is no reason to mention Chris Hardwick?

I think it would be an insult to Mr. Hardwick to compare 2x2 to 5x5BLD.

You say "all these people" who have taken an interest in 2x2, yet you only name one, and another possible. Naturally there are some more, such as yourself. But most people who do 2x2 only do it because it is an official event and because they want a decent ranking at it. Very few people have any strong interest in 2x2. Even those people that do have a large interest in it, such as yourself, have other events that they consider to be more important to themselves. I'm pretty sure that no one cubes essentially solely for 2x2, in the way that you "cubed" essentially only for clock a year ago. (Sure you did other things, but clock was the only thing you determinedly focussed on). Perhaps Rowe does consider 2x2 to be his die-hard event. But that is only one person.
Oh and before you say "well one person is more than no-one", I think you ought to look up the word hyperbole.

 

[Stefan]

I'm pretty sure that no one cubes essentially solely for 2x2

http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/results/p.php?i=2006TOMI01
3x3x3 average: 52.67
2x2x2 average: 4.98

Didn't even bother about competing in 3x3x3 anymore in the last two competitions.

 

[TobiasDaneels]

Escher: Saying that 2x2 should no longer be an official event is an opinion not only held by myself, but by Tyson Mao himself. I don't see how it is an ignorant statement. It is a statement of the viability of the event, which is strongly lacking. It is an event based on luck. 2x2 single WR has already shown that. 2x2 average WR will eventually be the same.

So "the past year" is relevant to this thread?

It's relevant to your statement that nobody cares about 2x2. Before Rowe (and Edouard to some extent), Lukasz was synonymous with 2x2 solving. All these people who have recently taken interest in 2x2 would do well to know that. If 5x5BLD becomes extremely popular in the future, would you say that there is no reason to mention Chris Hardwick?

I think it would be an insult to Mr. Hardwick to compare 2x2 to 5x5BLD.

You say "all these people" who have taken an interest in 2x2, yet you only name one, and another possible. Naturally there are some more, such as yourself. But most people who do 2x2 only do it because it is an official event and because they want a decent ranking at it. Very few people have any strong interest in 2x2. Even those people that do have a large interest in it, such as yourself, have other events that they consider to be more important to themselves. I'm pretty sure that no one cubes essentially solely for 2x2, in the way that you "cubed" essentially only for clock a year ago. (Sure you did other things, but clock was the only thing you determinedly focussed on). Perhaps Rowe does consider 2x2 to be his die-hard event. But that is only one person.
Oh and before you say "well one person is more than no-one", I think you ought to look up the word hyperbole.

Everyone has the right to say he doesn't want event x or y to be held officially anymore. So that's your opinion.

I do consider 2x2x2 a great event for several reasons.
*It may be inspiring for new speedcubers who only know the 3x3x3. It's one event more they can praticipate in, instead of sitting on a chair all competition long waiting for the one thing you can compete in. This way they will have more fun and will be more likely to stay in our 'sport'.

*It's a very tense event, where there is a lot off competition, even at the top. The differences are always very close (off course) which make that several competitors are possible winners. In others events it might be more clear who will win, and who will be seconds, and so on.

*I think it 's a very mediagenic event, which will only help making our 'sport' more popular.

Off course, some don't want our 'sport' to become more popular, but that's another discussion.

 

[Escher]

Escher: Saying that 2x2 should no longer be an official event is an opinion not only held by myself, but by Tyson Mao himself. I don't see how it is an ignorant statement. It is a statement of the viability of the event, which is strongly lacking. It is an event based on luck. 2x2 single WR has already shown that. 2x2 average WR will eventually be the same.

So "the past year" is relevant to this thread?

It's relevant to your statement that nobody cares about 2x2. Before Rowe (and Edouard to some extent), Lukasz was synonymous with 2x2 solving. All these people who have recently taken interest in 2x2 would do well to know that. If 5x5BLD becomes extremely popular in the future, would you say that there is no reason to mention Chris Hardwick?

I think it would be an insult to Mr. Hardwick to compare 2x2 to 5x5BLD.

You say "all these people" who have taken an interest in 2x2, yet you only name one, and another possible. Naturally there are some more, such as yourself. But most people who do 2x2 only do it because it is an official event and because they want a decent ranking at it. Very few people have any strong interest in 2x2. Even those people that do have a large interest in it, such as yourself, have other events that they consider to be more important to themselves. I'm pretty sure that no one cubes essentially solely for 2x2, in the way that you "cubed" essentially only for clock a year ago. (Sure you did other things, but clock was the only thing you determinedly focussed on). Perhaps Rowe does consider 2x2 to be his die-hard event. But that is only one person.
Oh and before you say "well one person is more than no-one", I think you ought to look up the word hyperbole.

Everybody has always known that the 2x2 single is based on luck, that's hardly an argument.
The 2x2 average will never be based on 'luck', or at least 'blind luck'. I seriously doubt there will ever be a competition where some 2x2 noob comes along and manages to get 5 LL skips in a row and takes the WR.
The reason I practice 2x2 and learn a lot of 2x2 methods and algorithms is specifically so that I can capitalise on scrambles that are easy only for me.

Btw, I can think of at least 3 more people off the top of my head that practice 2x2 as their main event.

Also, with your reasoning that the 2x2 average will eventually be completely based on luck, surely that goes for every other event too, eventually?

This obviously isn't going anywhere because I will never agree with any reasoning that says that 2x2 is a bad event and should be removed and I will never persuade you otherwise.

 

[Muesli]

. I seriously doubt there will ever be a competition where some 2x2 noob comes along and manages to get 5 LL skips in a row and takes the WR.

:rolleyes:

Lol.